The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutOrdinance 6418 05/17/2020 CITY OF SPRINGFIELD, OREGON ORDINANCE NO.______________ (GENERAL) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THEEUGENE-SPRINGFIELD METROPOLITAN AREA GENERAL PLAN (METRO PLAN) DIAGRAM BY REDESIGNATING APPROXIMATELY 0.85ACRES OF LAND FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MDR); CONCURRENTLYAMENDING THE GATEWAY REFINEMENT PLANDIAGRAM BY REDESIGNATING THE SAME APPROXIMATELY 0.85ACRES OF LAND FROM LDR TO MDR; CONCURRENTLY AMENDING THE SPRINGFIELD ZONING MAP BY REZONING APPROXIMATELY 0.96ACRES OF LAND FROM LDRTOMDR; ADOPTING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD FINDS THAT: WHEREAS,Section 5.14-100 of the Springfield Development Code (SDC) sets forth procedures for Metro Plandiagram amendments; and WHEREAS,Section 5.14-115.A of the SDC classifies amendments to the Metro Plandiagram for land inside the Springfield City limits as being Type I Metro Planamendments that require approval by Springfield only; and WHEREAS,Section 5.14-125.A of the SDCsets forth procedures for property owners to initiate a Type I Metro Plan diagram amendment for property under their ownership; and WHEREAS,the applicant/owner of the subject propertyinitiated a Type I Metro Plandiagram amendmentas follows: Redesignateapproximately 0.85 acres of property that isaddressed as 287 Deadmond Ferry Roadand identified as Assessor’s Map 17-03-15-40, Tax Lot 1800, as generally depicted and more particularly described in Exhibit Ato this Ordinance,from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential; and WHEREAS, Section 5.22-110 of the SDC sets forth procedures for property owners to initiate an amendment to the Springfield Zoning Map; and WHEREAS, Section 5.22-110.A.1 sets forth procedures for concurrent amendments to the Metro Plan diagram and Springfield Zoning Map through the Legislative Zoning Map amendment process; and WHEREASthe applicant/owner of the subject property initiated the following Springfield Zoning Map amendment: Rezoneapproximately 0.96acres of property identified herein as 287 Deadmond FerryRoad (Assessor’s Map 17-03-15-40, Tax Lot 1800)andalso including a 16-foot wide by 310.7-foot long strip of adjoining land (Assessor’s Map 17-03-22-00, Portion of Tax Lot 100),as generally depicted and more particularly described in Exhibit Bto this Ordinance, from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential; and WHEREAS, onApril 7, 2020the Springfield Planning Commission conducteda public hearing on the proposed Metro Plandiagram amendment requestand concurrent request forGateway Refinement Plan diagram andZoning Map amendments. The Development & Public Works Department staff report, including criteria of approval, findings and recommendations, together with the testimony and submittals of the persons testifying at that hearing, were considered and were made a part of the record of the proceeding; and Page 1 of 3 WHEREAS,at the regular meeting on April 7, 2020 the Planning Commission conducteddeliberations and voted 7 in favor and none (0)opposed to forward recommendationsof approval to the City Council forthe proposedMetro Plan diagram, Gateway Refinement Plandiagram, and Zoning Map amendments; and WHEREAS,onMay 4, 2020the City Council held a public hearing to receive testimony and hear comments on theproposals; and WHEREAS, The City Council is now ready to take action on these proposalswith due consideration given tothe above recommendationsof the Planning Commission and the evidence and testimony already in the record, as well as the evidence and testimony presented atthis public hearing held in the matter of adopting this Ordinance amending the Metro Plandiagram,Gateway Refinement Plandiagram, and Springfield Zoning Map; and WHEREAS, substantial evidence exists within the record and the findingsset forth in Exhibits C &D, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference,that the proposal meets the relevant approval criteria, NOW, THEREFORE,BASED ON THE FOREGOING FINDINGS, THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1.The above findings and conclusions are hereby adopted. Section 2.The applicant narrative and staff reportsand recommendationsto this Ordinance set forth in Exhibits C &D,attached hereto and incorporated hereinby reference,are hereby adopted. Section 3.The Metro Plandiagram designation of the subject propertyidentified as 287 Deadmond Ferry Road (Assessor’s Map 17-03-15-40,Tax Lot 1800),generally depicted and more particularly described in Exhibit Aattached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, is hereby amended from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Medium Density Residential (MDR). Section 4.The Gateway Refinement Plan diagram designation of the subject property identified as287 Deadmond Ferry Road(Assessor’s Map 17-03-15-40, Tax Lot 1800),generally depicted and more particularly described in Exhibit Aattached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, is hereby amended from LDRto MDR. Section 5.The Springfield Zoning Map is hereby amended to rezone the subject property identified as 287 Deadmond Ferry Road (Assessor’s Map 17-03-15-40,Tax Lot 1800) and also including a 16-foot wide by 310.7-foot long strip of land abutting the subject property to the east (Assessor’s Map 17-03-22-00, Portion of Tax Lot 100),generally depicted and more particularly described in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, from LDR to MDR . Section 6.If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, that portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct, and independent provision and that holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance. Section 7.Notwithstanding the effective date of ordinances as provided by Section 2.110 of the Springfield Municipal Code 1997, this ordinance shall become effective 30 days from the date of passage by the City Council and approval by the Mayor or upon the date of acknowledgement as provided in ORS 197.625, whichever date is later. Page 2 of 3 Ordinance No. 6418 ADOPTED by the CityCouncil of the City of Springfield this ____ day of ______________, 2020 by a vote of ____for and ____ against. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Springfield this ____ day of _______________, 2020. _____________________ Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________________ City Recorder 5/18/2020 Page 3 of 3 Ordinance No. 6418 Exhibit A, Page 1 of 1 EXHIBIT A PROPERTY REDESIGNATED FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL Deadmond Ferry Rd St Joseph Pl LEGAL DESCRIPTION Beginning at the Northeast corner of the William Stevens Donation Land Claim No. 46, in Township 17 South Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian; thence North 89° thence South 15.0 feet to a point on the South line of County Road No. 90 (Deadmond Ferry Road), said point being the true point of beginning; running thence South 89° said South line, South 26° ° true point of beginning, in Lane County, Oregon. Ordinance No. 6418 Exhibit B, Page 1 of 1 EXHIBIT B PROPERTIES REZONED FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL Deadmond Ferry Rd St Joseph Pl LEGAL DESCRIPTION Beginning at the Northeast corner of the William Stevens Donation Land Claim No. 46, in Township 17 South Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian; thence North 89° thence South 15.0 feet to a point on the South line of County Road No. 90 (Deadmond Ferry Road), said point being the true point of beginning; running thence South 89° said South line, South 26° ° true point of beginning, in Lane County, Oregon. ALSO INCLUDING: Beginning at a point on the South line of County Road No. 90, which point is 171 feet North 89° West of a point marked by an iron pipe which is 16.7 feet South 26° ° from the Northwest corner of the William M. Stevens Donation Land Claim No. 46, Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian; and running thence North 89° ° thence South 89° 6.0 feet; thence North 26° The Basis of in Lane County, Oregon. Ordinance No. 6418 Exhibit C, Page 1 of 17 Staff Reportand Findings Springfield City Council Type I Amendment to the Metro Plan Diagram MeetingDate: May 4, 2020 CaseNumber:811-20-000031-TYP4 Applicant: Rick Satre, Schirmer Satre Group on behalf of Moving ForwardLLC Project Location: 287Deadmond Ferry Road(Assessor’sMap 17-03-15-40, Tax Lot 1800). Request The City has received applications for a Type I Metro Plandiagram amendment and a concurrent Zoning Map amendment from a property owner.In accordance with Springfield Development Code (SDC) 5.14- 115.A.1, proposals for redesignating land inside the City limits are classified as a Type I Metro Plan diagram amendment requiring approval by Springfield only. In accordance with SDC Section 5.14- 125.A, an amendment to the Metro Plandiagram can be initiated by a property owner at any time. In accordance with SDC 5.14-130, the property-owner initiated amendment to the Metro Plandiagram is processed as a Type IV land use action that requires public hearings before the Springfield Planning Commission and City Council. The proposed Metro Plandiagramamendment would change the plan designation forthe subjectparcel from Low Density Residential (LDR) to MediumDensity Residential (MDR). The proposed amendment to the Metro Plandiagram would also amend the adopted Gateway Refinement Plandiagram, which is a refinement plan to the Metro Plan. Concurrent with the comprehensive plan amendment, anamendment to the Springfield Zoning Map would change the zoning of the sitefrom LDR to MDR. The proposed plan designation and zoning would allow for uses listed at SDC 3.2-210 Schedule of Uses, including the applicant’s plan for construction of multi-unit residential dwellings on the site. The application was submitted on February 3, 2020and the Springfield Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed Metro Plandiagram,Gateway Refinement Plandiagram,and Zoning Map amendments onApril 7, 2020.The Planning Commission unanimously adopted a recommendation of support for the proposal at the April 7, 2020 meeting. Notification and Written Comments In accordance with the Oregon Administrative Rules (OARs) 660-018-0020, prior to adopting a change to an acknowledged comprehensive plan or land use regulation, local governments are required to notify the state Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) at least 35 days prior to the first evidentiary hearing. A Notice of Proposed Amendment was transmitted to the DLCD onFebruary 24, 2020, which is 43 days prior to the initial public hearing on the matter. In accordance with SDC 5.2-110.B, Type IV land use decisions require mailed notification as well as notice in a newspaper of general circulation.Notification of the May 4, 2020City Councilpublic hearing was mailed to adjacent property owners and residents on March 16, 2020and published in the legal notices section of The Register GuardonMarch 24 and 31, 2020.Staff also posted notices of the April 7, 2020 Planning Commission and May 4, 2020 City Council public hearings along the Deadmond Ferry Road Ordinance No. 6418 Exhibit C, Page 2 of 17 frontage ofthe subject property, in the lobby of City Hall, on the Development &Public Works office digital display, and on the City’s webpage. To comply with the Governor’s strong recommendation in Executive Order 20-12 that local governments implement social distancing and conduct work remotely as much as possible, the April 7, 2020 Planning Commission meeting wasconducted via an online meeting platform that also allows members of the public to join the meeting virtually or call-in via atoll free number. In addition, members of the public were permitted to view the online meeting and submit public testimony in person at Springfield City Hall. No members of the public attended. On April 16, 2020, the Governor issued Executive Order 20-16, which requires governing bodies to hold public meetings and hearings by telephone, video, or through other electronic or virtual means whenever possible. The governing body must make available a method by which the public can listen to or virtually attend the public meeting or hearing at the time it occurs. Executive Order 20-16 allows governing bodies to accept public testimony by telephone, video, or other virtual or electronic means, or to provide a means to submit written testimony (including email or other electronic methods)that the governing body can consider in a timely manner. Executive Order 20-16 overrides conflicting requirements for quasi-judicial public hearings in state law or in the Springfield Development Code or Metro Plan. The May 4 City Council public hearing is being conducted via online meeting platform that allows members of the public to listen to the meeting online or by calling a toll free number. Members of the public may provide testimony to the Council by observing the online meeting at City Hall in Council chambers, or by joining the online meeting remotely. The public may listen to the meeting by phone but cannot provide testimonyby phone. Details regarding how to join the online meeting were provided in the City Council meeting agenda, and posted on the City’swebsite. To comply with the requirements of EO 20-16 and to ensure that all interested parties can submit testimony in this matter, the City Council held open the public record until May 18, 2020. No additionalwrittentestimony has been received. Criteria of Approval Section 5.14-135 of the SDC contains the criteria of approval for the decision maker to utilize during review of Metro Plandiagram amendments. The Criteria of approval are: SDC 5.14-135 CRITERIA A Metro Plan amendment may be approved only if the Springfield City Council and other applicable governing body or bodies find that the proposal conforms to the following criteria: A.The amendment shall be consistent with applicable Statewide Planning Goals; and B.Plan inconsistency: 1.In those caseswhere the Metro Planapplies, adoption of the amendment shall not make the Metro Planinternally inconsistent. 2.In cases where Springfield Comprehensive Plan applies, the amendment shall be consistent with the Springfield Comprehensive Plan. A. ConsistencywithApplicable State-Wide Planning Goals Ordinance No. 6418 Exhibit C, Page 3 of 17 Finding 1:Of the 19 statewide goals, 13 should be considered in general terms as “urban” goals, that is, these goals will be applicable for purposes of review to any plan map amendmentsin the city; however, it is the proposal and its effect on the purpose of these goals that will determine whether or not the proposed amendment is “consistent with” the applicable goals. The goals that are to be evaluated are:Goal 1 –Citizen Involvement; Goal 2 –Land Use Planning; Goal 5 - Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Open Spaces; Goal 6 - Air, Water and Land Resources Quality; Goal 7 – Areas Subject to Natural Hazards; Goal 8 - Recreational Needs;Goal 9 – Economic Development;Goal 10 – Housing; Goal 11 - Public Facilities and Services; Goal 12 - Transportation; Goal 13 - Energy Conservation;Goal 14 –Urbanization; and Goal 15 - Willamette River Greenway.All of the statewide goals are listed below; the narrative that accompanies each is more expositive when the discussion applies to the 13goals identified above. Goal 1 –Citizen Involvement Applicant’s Narrative: “The Cityof Springfield has an acknowledged citizen involvement program that ensures the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process. The Springfield Code (SDC Section 5.14-100 Metro Plan Amendments and the City’s public notice standards – SDC Section 5.2-115) requires public hearings before the Springfield Planning Commission and the Springfield City Council, and includes specifications for the content, timing and dispersal of mailed notice. This proposed Metro Plan amendment does not amend the citizen involvement program. The process for adopting amendments is in accordance with Statewide Planning Goal 1, as it complies with the requirements of the State’s citizen involvement provisions. Therefore, the amendment is consistentwith Statewide Planning Goal 1.” Finding 2:Goal 1 –Citizen Involvement calls for “the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process.”As the applicant notes in their narrative, the proposed citizen- initiated amendmentto the adopted Metro Plandiagram issubject to the City’s acknowledged plan amendment process –SDC Section 5.14-100 Metro Plan Amendments and the City’s public notice standards –SDC Section 5.2-115 which requires a public hearing before the Springfield Planning Commission and a public hearing before the Springfield City Council, and includes specifications for the content, timing and dispersal of mailed notice (see description following). The Planning Commissionpublic hearing to consider the proposed amendments washeld April 7, 2020.Mailed notification of the Planning Commission and City Council public hearings was provided to all property owners and residents within 300 feet of the subject property on March 16, 2020.The City Councilpublic hearingwas advertised in thelegal notices section of the Register-Guardon March 24 & 31, 2020.The recommendations of the Planning Commissionto the Springfield City Council are included with the AIS for consideration at thepublic hearing meeting currently scheduled for May 4, 2020.The notice for this proposed Metro Plandiagramamendmentcomplies with SDC 5.2- 115 and is consistent with Goal 1 requirements. Additional information was provided to the public for how to attend the meeting via online meeting platform or by phone, as described above.The public hearing on May 4 is being conducted in compliance with Executive Order 20-16. Goal 2 –Land Use Planning Applicant’s Narrative: “The Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) is the acknowledged comprehensive plan for guiding land use planning in Springfield. Thesubject property is also within the adopted Gateway Refinement Plan area and the proposed amendment to the Metro Plan diagram would concurrently amend the adopted Refinement Plan diagram. The City has also adopted the Springfield Comprehensive Plan. The policies and implementation actions of Ordinance No. 6418 Exhibit C, Page 4 of 17 the Springfield 2030 Refinement PlanResidential Land Use and Housing Elementare intended to refine and update the goals, objectives and policies of the Metro Plan’s Residential Land Use and Housing Element. Therefore, both plans are applicable to this request and the proposed Metro Plan amendment and Zone Change will be consistent with both the Metro Plan and the Springfield Comprehensive Plan. These findings and records show that there is an adequate factual base for decisions to be made concerning the proposed amendment. Goal 2 further requires that the City coordinate the review of the amendment with affected governmental units. Therefore, the amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 2.” Finding 3: Goal 2 –Land Use Planning outlines the basic procedures for Oregon’s statewide planning program. In accordance with Goal 2, land use decisions are to be made in accordance with a comprehensive plan, and jurisdictions are to adopt suitable implementation ordinances that put the plan’s policies into force and effect. Consistent with the City’s coordination responsibilities and obligations to provide affected local agencies with an opportunity to comment, the City sent a copy of the application submittals to the following agencies: Willamalane Park & Recreation District; Springfield Utility Board (water, ground water protection, electricity and energy conservation);Lane 911; United States Postal Service; Northwest Natural Gas; Emerald People’s Utility District; Rainbow Water District; Eugene Water and Electric Board –Water and Electric Departments; Springfield School District #19 Maintenance, Safe Routes to School andFinancial Services; Lane County Transportation, County Sanitarian; Lane Regional Air Pollution Authority; Comcast Cable; CenturyLink; Lane Transit District; and ODOT Planning and Development, State Highway Division. Additionally, notice was provided electronically to DLCD on February 24, 2020. Finding 4: The Metro Planis the acknowledged comprehensive plan for guiding land use planning in Springfield. The City has adopted other neighborhood- or area-specific plans (such as Refinement Plans) that provide more detailed direction for land use planning under the umbrella of the Metro Plan.The subject property is within the adopted Gateway Refinement Planarea and the proposed amendment to the Metro Plandiagram would concurrently amend the adopted Refinement Plan diagram.Additionally, the City has developedand adopted key elements of theSpringfield Comprehensive Plan. The Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Elementprovides supplemental policy and expands upon –but does not replace –the applicable residential Metro Planpolicies. The City’s initial action to this endwas the adoption of Ordinance #6268 on June 20, 2011, which “\[E\]stablishes a separate Urban Growth Boundary for the City ofSpringfield as required by ORS 197.304 anda tax lot specific map of the UGB in accordancewith OAR 660-024- 0020(2); and the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Elementand Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis February 2011 attached as Exhibit A and B and incorporated here by this reference are adopted pursuantto ORS 197.304 as refinements to the Metro Plan.” This action refined and updatedthe Metro Plan’s Residential Element, including findings, objectives and policies. Finding 5: The public hearing process used for amendment of the Metro Planand adopted Refinement Plans is specified in Chapter IV Metro PlanReview, Amendments, and Refinements. The findings under Criteria B (below) demonstrate that the proposed amendmentwill not make the adopted Metro Plan internally inconsistent. Ordinance No. 6418 Exhibit C, Page 5 of 17 Finding 6: The Springfield Development Codeis a key mechanism used to implement the goals and policiesof the City’s adopted comprehensive plans, particularly the Metro Plan.The proposal is classified as a Type I amendment tothe adopted Metro Plandiagramthat is approved by Springfield only in accordance with SDC 5.14-115.A. The proposed Metro Plandiagram amendment is processed as a Type IV land use action as described in SDC 5.1-140 and 5.14-130. The process observed forthe proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment is consistent with the policies pertaining to Review, Amendments and Refinements. Additionally, the proposed Metro Plandiagram amendment has been initiated in accordance with the provisions of the City’s acknowledged Comprehensive Plan and Development Code. Staff finds the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment does not affect City ordinances, policies, plans, and studies adopted to comply with Goal 2 requirements, and that notice and coordination requirements “with those local governments, state and federal agencies and special districts which have programs, land ownerships,or responsibilities within the area” that includes this proposalhave been providedconsistent with Goal 2. Goal 3 –Agricultural Land Applicant’s Narrative: “Goal 3 is not applicable to this amendment, as the subject property and proposed actions arelocated within anacknowledged urban growth boundaryand do not affect any agricultural plan designation or use.Therefore, Goal 3 is not applicable or relevant to the amendment.” Finding 7: Goal 3 – As noted by the applicant in their narrative, Agricultural Land applies to areas subject to farm zoning that are outside acknowledged urban growth boundaries (UGBs): “Agricultural land does not includeland within acknowledged urban growthboundaries or land within acknowledgedexceptions to Goals 3 or 4.” (Text of Goal 3).The City has an acknowledged UGB and therefore consistent with the express language of the Goal, does not have farm land zoning within its jurisdictional boundary.Furthermore, the site of the proposed Metro Plandiagram amendment is inside the City’s acknowledged UGBand within a developed neighborhood. Consequently, and as expressed in the text of the Goal, Goal 3 is not applicable. Goal 4 –Forest Land Applicant’s Narrative: “Goal 4 is not applicable as the subject property and proposed actions do not affect any forest plan designation or use. Goal 4 does not apply within urban growth boundaries and, therefore, does not apply to the subject property nor affect the area’s compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 4. Consequently, Goal 4 is not applicable.” Finding 8: Goal 4 –Forest Land applies to timber lands zoned for that use that are outside acknowledged UGBs with the intent to conserve forest lands for forest uses: “Oregon Administrative Rule 660-006-0020: Plan Designation Within an Urban Growth Boundary.Goal 4 does not apply within urban growth boundaries and therefore, the designation of forest lands is not required.”The City has an acknowledged UGB and does not have forest zoning within its incorporated area.Furthermore, the site of the proposed Metro Plandiagram amendment is inside the City’s UGB.Consequently, and as expressed in the text of the Goal,Goal 4is not applicable. Goal 5 –Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Open Spaces Ordinance No. 6418 Exhibit C, Page 6 of 17 Applicant’s Narrative: “Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources applies to more than a dozen natural and cultural resources such as wildlife habitats and wetlands and establishes a process for each resource to be inventoried and evaluated. The Springfield Natural Resources Inventory does not list a Goal 5 natural resource on or near the site. The proposed amendment does not amend a plan or code provision adopted to protect a Goal 5 resource, does not allow new uses that could conflict with a Goal 5 resource site, and does not amend the acknowledged Urban Growth Boundary. Therefore, Goal 5 does not apply to this amendment.” Finding 9: Goal 5 –Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources appliesto more than a dozen natural and cultural resources such as wildlife habitats and wetlands, and establishes a process for each resource to be inventoried and evaluated. As stated in the applicant’s narrative, the site that is subject of the proposed Metro Plandiagram amendment has not been identified in the City’s Natural Resources Inventory, Register of Historic Sites, or the Willamalane Park & Recreation District Comprehensive Plan.Additionally, the City does not have a specific zoning district which it applies to inventoried Goal 5 natural resources, where they exist.Therefore, thisaction does not alter the City’sacknowledgedcompliance with Goal 5. Goal 6 –Air, Water and Land Resources Quality Applicant’s Narrative: “Goal 6addresses waste and discharges from development and is aimed at protecting air, water, and land from impacts from those discharges. Nothing in the proposal, character of the site, or potential uses indicates a future development that would compromise air, water, and land resources. The proposal does not amend the metropolitan area’s air, water quality, or land resource policies. The City can reasonably expect that future development of the site complies with applicable environmental laws. Therefore, the amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 6.” Finding 10: Goal 6 –Air, Water and Land Resources Quality applies to local comprehensive plans and the implementation of measures consistentwith state and Federal regulations on matters such as clean air, clean water, and preventing groundwater pollution. The proposed Metro Plandiagram amendment and concurrent Gateway Refinement Planamendment doesnot affect City ordinances, policies, plans, and studies adopted to comply with Goal 6 requirements. Therefore, this action does not alter the City’s acknowledged compliance with Goal 6. Goal 7 –Areas Subject to Natural Hazards Applicant’s Narrative: “Goal 7 requires that local governmentplanning programs include provisions to protect people and property from natural hazards such as floods, landslides, earthquakes and related hazards, tsunamis and wildfires. The subject property is within a mature, developed residential neighborhood and is not subject to hazards normally associated with steep slopes, wildfires, or tsunamis. The northern portion of the subject property is located in Flood Zone A, so a Floodplain Development Permit will be acquired. Other hazards, such as earthquakes and severe winter storms can be mitigated at the time of development based on accepted building codes and building techniques. Therefore, this amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 7.” Finding 11: Goal 7 –Areas Subject to Natural Hazards applies to development in areas such as floodplains and potential landslide areas. Local jurisdictions are required to apply “appropriate safeguards” when planning for development in hazard areas. The City has inventoried areas subject to natural hazards such as the McKenzie and Willamette River floodplains and potential landslide Ordinance No. 6418 Exhibit C, Page 7 of 17 areas on steeply sloping hillsides.The subject site is within a developed residential neighborhood and a portion of the property is withinthe mapped 100-yearflood hazard area of the McKenzie River. Future site development will be subject to the provisions of the City’s Site Plan Review and Floodplain Overlay District permitting processas described in SDC 5.17-100. Finding 12:The proposed Metro Plandiagram amendment has no effecton City ordinances, policies, plans, and studies adopted to comply with Goal 7 requirementsand siting standards for development within hillside areas or the mapped flood hazard area of the McKenzie and Willamette Rivers. Therefore, this action has no effecton the City’s acknowledged compliance with Goal 7. Goal 8 –Recreational Needs Applicant’s Narrative: “Goal 8requires communities to evaluate their recreation areas and facilities and to develop plans to address current and projected demand. The Lyle Hatfield Linear Path, abuts the eastern boundary line of the subject property and is listed on the Willamalane Park & Recreation District’s 20-Year Comprehensive Plan. The pathhas been extended to Deadmond Ferry Road and on-street bike paths have been added. The proposed amendment will not impact the provision of public recreational facilities nor will it affect access to existing or future public recreational facilities. The proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment would also not affect Willamalane’s adopted Comprehensive Plan or other ordinances, policies, plans, and studies adopted to comply with Goal 8 requirements. As such, the amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 8.” Finding 13:As stated in the applicant’s narrative, Goal 8 –Recreational Needs requires communities to evaluate their recreation areas and facilities and to develop plans to address current and projected demand. The provision of recreation services within Springfield is the responsibility of Willamalane Park & Recreation District. Willamalane has an adopted 20-Year Comprehensive Plan for the provision of park, open space and recreation services for Springfield. The proposed Metro Plandiagram amendment would not affect Willamalane’s adopted Comprehensive Plan or other ordinances, policies, plans, and studies adopted to comply with Goal 8 requirements. Therefore, this action has no effect on the City’s acknowledged compliance with Goal 8. Goal 9 –Economic Development Applicant’s Narrative: “The proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment does not affect economic development, as it is not requesting to change the designation of the subject site to or from commercial. The amendment seeks to designate land currently identified as Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential. Therefore, the proposedamendment will not impact economic development or commercial land supply in any way. The amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 9.” Finding 14: Goal 9 –Economic Development addresses diversification and improvement of the economy. It requires local jurisdictions to conduct an inventory of commercial and industrial lands, anticipate future needs for such lands, and provide enough appropriately-zoned land to meet the projected demandover a 20-year planning horizon.The City previously completed an analysis of its employment land base and determined that a deficit existed. To address the projected deficit of commercial and industrial land, theCity completed a multi-year process to expandthe UGB in the th North Gateway and South 28Street areas. Expansion of the UGB is intended to provide sufficient employment-generating land area for the mandated 20-year planning horizon. The proposed Ordinance No. 6418 Exhibit C, Page 8 of 17 redesignation and rezoning of the subject propertyfrom Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residentialwill not affect the amount of employment land within the City’s inventory. Goal 10 - Housing Applicant’s Narrative: “Goal 10 requires that communities plan for and maintain an inventory of buildable residential land for needed housing units. The Administrative Rule for Statewide Planning Goal 10 (OAR 660 Division 8) states: ‘The mix and density of needed housing is determined in the housing needs projection. Sufficient buildable land shall be designated on the comprehensive plan map to satisfy housing needs by type and density range as determined in the housing needs projection.’ The subject property is currently designated for Low Density Residential and the applicant wishes to redesignate the property as Medium Density Residential. The Springfield 2030 Residential Land and Housing Element designates ‘the areas of the city best suited to high density residential uses are Downtown, Glenwood Riverfront/Franklin Corridor, and Gateway. Plans for these areas shall be updated to support development of additional high density residential uses adjacent to commercial and employment areas (pg. 5).’ The proposed redesignation would change the anticipated type of housing form on the property from single-family residential to multi-family, attached homes, or townhouses, or a combination of these types. Third-party analysis has determined that a surplus of LDR designated land exists within the City’sland inventory. Redesignation of the subject property would have an incremental impact to the City’s residential land base; arguably, the impact would be limited to a recalculation of surplus versus deficit levels for each of the Low and Medium Density Residential categories. A series of Metro Plan amendments and Zone Changes have reduced the surplus of LDR designated land cited in the Residential Land Use and Housing Element by more than half. As of April 2019, the amount of surplus LDR-designated landin the City’s inventory was 168 acres and the amount of surplus MDR designated land was 78 acres. As such, the site is adjacent to a pedestrian and transit-oriented Nodal Development area, and is close to major employers, health care facilities, multi-use pathway connections, and the regional transportation network. For these reasons, the site is appropriate for development under higher residential densities allowed in the MDR plan designation and zoning. Given this, the proposed Metro Plan amendment will have no adverse effect on the city’s acknowledged compliance with Goal 10.” Finding 15: Goal 10 –Housing applies to the planning for –and provision of –needed housing types, including multi-family and manufactured housing.As noted by the applicant’s narrative, staff and third-party analysis has determined that a surplus of LDR designated land exists within the City’s land inventory. Based on the applicant’s submittal (and staff recommendations found later in this reportand the accompanying Zoning Map Amendment staff report), the amount of surplus Low Density Residential land would be reduced by about 0.85 acres andthe amount of surplus Medium Density Residential (MDR) land would increase by about 0.85acres.Findings 10 and 11 of the Residential Land Use and Housing Elementidentify a surplus of approximately 378 gross acres of LDR designation, a surplus of approximately 76 gross acres of MDR designation, and a deficit of approximately 28 gross acres of HDR designation. The Residential Land Use and Housing Element (Residential Finding 11, Page 11) goes on to state that the 28-acre deficit of HDR designation will be met through redevelopment in Glenwood. Finding 16: A series of Metro Plan amendments and Zone Changes have reduced the surplus of LDR designated land by more than half. Adopted Ordinances 6364, 6373, 6374, 6375, 6378,6395, Ordinance No. 6418 Exhibit C, Page 9 of 17 6400and 6407redesignated and rezoned more than 226.9 net acres of LDR-designated landto non- residential or higher density residential uses.Therefore, the amount of surplus LDR-designatedland in the City’s inventory is now approximately 151 acres.With adoption of Ordinances 6378, 6395 and 6400, the amount of surplus MDR designation has increased by 3.58 acres to approximately 79.6 acres. The proposed Metro Planamendment and Zone Change would further adjust these calculatedsurpluses. Finding 17: The Springfield2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Element classifies the subject site as partially developed residential land. Therefore, partof the subject site is already contemplated for further residential development or redevelopment.Upon redesignation and rezoning of the site, the City will maintain an overall surplus of both LDR and MDR-designated land, although the quantities will change slightly.These zoning districts allow for a variety of housing forms, including single-detached, duplex, attached, four-plex, row house, and low-rise apartment units.Maintaining an adequate inventory of land for all forms of housing is consistent with Goal 10 requirements. Finding 18:Currently, the property has a single-unitdwelling and the LDR zoning would allow for up to 12 dwelling units on the site. Upon redesignation and rezoning of the property to MDR, a minimum of 12 dwelling units would be required to meet the density requirements of the district with a maximum of 24 units. Trends in the Gateway area, including redesignation and rezoning of nearby properties to higher density residential, support redevelopment of the subject site with higher density residential uses. Overall, the requested Metro Plan Amendment would result in a net increase in dwelling units on the site. The provision of needed housing in a variety of forms, including multi-unit dwellings, isconsistent with meeting Goal 10 requirements. Finding 19:The proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone changewould not adversely affect other City ordinances, policies, plans, and studies adopted to comply with Goal 10 requirements.Therefore, this action has no adverse effect on the city’s acknowledged compliance with Goal 10. Goal 11 –Public Facilities and Services Applicant’s Narrative: “The subject site is located inside the City limits; thus, the existing level of public facilities and services is adequate to serve the needs of existing and future development. This area is already developed for a combination of industrial (north of the site), office, health care and internet services, and the public facilities serving this area have been designed accordingly. The amendment to the Metro Plan diagram \[does\] not significantly affect the planning or development of future public facilities or services. Therefore, the amendment isconsistent with Statewide Planning Goal 11.” Finding 20: Goal 11 –Public Facilities and Services addressesthe efficient planning and provision of public services such as sewer, water,law enforcement, and fire protection.In accordance with OAR 660-011-0005(5), public facilities include water, sewer and transportation facilities, but do not include buildings, structures or equipment incidental to the operation of those facilities. The proposed redesignation and rezoning shouldnot result in permitted uses that will have anadverse effecton the demand for public facilities and services provided to the subject property and adjacent properties. This area of Springfield is already planned for a varietyof residential, campus industrial, and institutionaldevelopment and the public facilities serving this area have been designed accordingly.Staff recently evaluated thesewer capacity for this area of Gatewayat the time of Ordinance No. 6418 Exhibit C, Page 10 of 17 proposed redesignation and rezoning of the Patrician Mobile Home Park site to ensure there would be no adverse impact to the sanitary sewer system. The findingsfor this area of the Gateway neighborhood indicate that the incrementally higherdwelling unit density resulting from the proposed Metro Planamendment and Zone Change shouldnot have an adverse impact to the City’s sanitary sewersystem. Goal 12 –Transportation Applicant’s Narrative: “Goal 12 is implemented through the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR), as defined in Oregon Administrative Rule OAR 660-012-0000 et. seq. The Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area Transportation Plan (TransPlan) provides the regional policy framework through which the TPR is implemented at the local level. The TPR (OAR 660-012-0060) states that when land use changes, including amendments to acknowledged comprehensive plans, significantly affecting an existing or planned transportation facility, the local government shall put in place measures to assure that the allowed land uses are consistent with the identified function, capacity, and performance standards of the facility. This plan amendment will increase the trip generation potential of the subject property since the subject property will be redesignated to allow higher density residential housing. Due to potential traffic impact, the applicant has commissioned Kelly Sandow, a Licensed Traffic Engineer, to evaluate whether the plan amendment and zone change will have a significant impact on Deadmond Ferry Road. The traffic scoping letter created by Kelly Sandow is provided in Attachment 3.” Finding 21:Theapplicant’s Goal 12 Transportation findingsconclude thatthe trip generation for a proposed multi-unit developmentis below the City’s threshold for requiring a Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) and therefore would not create a significant effect.The applicant’s Traffic Engineer assumed development of 12 single family dwelling units under the existing plan designation and zoning and 24 low-rise multi-unit dwellings under the proposed plan designation and zoning. Each scenario represents the reasonable worst-case scenario for traffic generation under the relevant plan designation and zoning. The proposed redesignation and rezoning results in 4 new peak hour trips and 7 fewer daily tripsoverall, which is not a significant increase over the peak hour or daily trips beyond what could be generated under the current LDR zoning and plan designation. The trip generation calculations prepared by Sandow Engineering and cited in the applicant’s narrative above are found in Attachment 7 of the Metro PlanAmendment application package (Attachment 3 to the AIS). Therefore, the proposed redesignation and rezoning is consistent with Goal 12 as implemented by the Transportation Planning Rule. Goal 13 –Energy Conservation Applicant’s Narrative: “Statewide Planning Goal 13 calls for land uses to be managed and controlled ‘so as to maximize the conservation of all forms of energy, based upon sound economic principles.’ Converting the 0.85 acre property from LDR to MDR should not have an appreciable impact to energy consumption, and in fact may offer opportunities for increased energy efficiency through contemporary multi-family housing design. The developer will have an opportunity to incorporate suitable energy conservation measures into the future site development upon redesignation and rezoning of the subject property. The City’s conservation measures applicable to storm water management, temporary storage, filtration and discharge would apply to multi-family residential uses developed on this site; therefore, this proposal is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 13.” Ordinance No. 6418 Exhibit C, Page 11 of 17 Finding 22: The proposed comprehensive planamendmentand rezoningdoes not affect the City’s ordinances, policies,plans, or studies adopted to comply with Goal 13 requirements. As stated in the applicant’s narrative, converting the property from LDR to MDR should not have an appreciable impact toenergy consumptionand couldoffer opportunities for increased energy efficiency by implementing green buildingconcepts. The developer will have an opportunity to incorporate suitable energy conservation measures into the future site developmentwhen detailed construction plans are prepared for the site. The City’s building codes comply with all Oregon State Building Codes Agency standards for energy efficiency in residential building design. The site’s solar access is not compromised by surrounding development. The City’s conservation measures applicable to storm water management, temporary storage, filtration and discharge would apply to multi-unit residential uses developed on this site; therefore, this action has no effect on the City’s acknowledged compliance with Goal 13. Goal 14 - Urbanization Applicant’s Narrative: “The amendment does not affect the transition from rural to urban land use, as the subject property is within the City limits. The City already planned for residential land use on the subject property when completing its residential buildable land inventory. Nevertheless, the proposed redesignation and zone change will not affect compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 14.” Finding 23: Goal 14 –Urbanization requires cities to estimate future growth rates and patterns, and to incorporate, plan, and zone enough land to meet the projected demands. The City already plannedfor residential land use on the subject property when completing its residential buildable land inventory.Consistent with provisions of Goal 14,the City is responding to a request from a property owner to redesignate and rezone the subject property from low density residential to a higher density residential use. However, the proposed redesignation and zone changedoes not affect the City’s adopted ordinances, policies, plans, or studies adopted to satisfy the compliance requirements of Goal 14. Goal 15 –Willamette River Greenway Applicant’s Narrative: “The subject property is not within the boundaries of the Willamette River Greenway. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 15 does not apply.” Finding 24: Goal 15 –Willamette River Greenway establishes procedures for administering the 300 miles of greenway that borders the Willamette River, including portions that are inside the City limits and UGBof Springfield.The subject site is not within the adopted Willamette River Greenway Boundary area so this goal is not applicable; therefore, this action has no effect on the city’s acknowledged compliance with Goal 15. Goals 16-19 Estuarine Resources, Coastal Shorelands, Beaches and Dunes, and Ocean Resources Applicant’s Narrative:“There are no coastal, ocean, estuarine, or beach and dune resources on or adjacent to the subject property. Therefore, these goals are not relevant, and the proposed amendment will not affect compliance with statewide planning Goals 16 through 19. This proposed Metro Plan Amendment meets the applicable Statewide Planning Goals.” Ordinance No. 6418 Exhibit C, Page 12 of 17 Finding 25: Goals 16-19 – Estuarine Resources; Coastal Shorelands; Beaches and Dunes; and Ocean Resources; these goals do not apply to land within the Willamette Valley,including Springfield. Therefore, in the same way that Goals 3 and 4 do not apply in Springfield, Goals 16-19 do not apply in Springfield or to land use regulations adopted in Springfield. Conclusion: Staff has concludedthat the proposed Metro Plandiagramland use designation amendment from Low Density Residential to MediumDensity Residentialis consistent withall applicable statewide land use planning goalsinaccordance withSDC 5.14-135.A. B.Plan Inconsistency 1.In those cases where the Metro Planapplies, adoption of the amendment shall not make the Metro Planinternally inconsistent. Applicant’s Narrative: “The adopted Metro Plan is the principal document that creates a framework for land use policy within the City of Springfield. The subject property is within the adopted Gateway Refinement Plan area. The Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Elementare intended torefine and updatethe goals, objectives and policies of the Metro Plan’s Residential Land Use and Housing Element. This relationship therefore requires the proposed amendment be consistent with the Springfield Comprehensive Plan and the Gateway Refinement Plan. The proposed Metro Plan amendment does not make the Metro Plan internally inconsistent. It does not affect any Metro Plan policies or text. Moreover, the Gateway Refinement Plan will not be made inconsistent through this amendment. The Gateway Refinement plan will be amended automatically in conjunction with the Metro Plan amendment. There is no conflictcreated by the proposed amendment to the residential land inventory, needed employment land inventory, nor any other land use elements of the Metro Plan or Gateway Refinement Plan.” Finding 26: The adopted Metro Planand Springfield 2030 Comprehensive Plan arethe principal policy documents that create the broad framework forland use planning withinthe City of Springfield. The City’s adopted Zoning Map implements the zoning designationsof the Metro Plan diagram and localized Refinement Plans, which are adopted amendments to the Metro Plan.The subject property is within theadoptedGateway Refinement Planarea, andadoption of Springfield Ordinance #6268 included the new Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Element.As noted inthe applicant’s narrative statementabove, the policies and implementation actions of the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Elementare intended to refine and update(as opposedto replace) the goals, objectives and policies of the Metro Plan’sResidential Land Use and Housing Element.Therefore, both plans are applicable to this request andthe proposed Metro Planamendment and Zone Change needs to be consistent with both theMetro Planand theSpringfield Comprehensive Plan. The process and criteria for amending refinement plans is found in SDC 5.6-115 and as preempted in SDC 5.14-120 and 5.14-135. Finding 27: The proposal is consistent with the Residential Land Use and Housing Elementof the adopted Metro Planincluding policies pertaining to residential land supply and demand. In accordance with Policy A.4, the City is to use annexation, provision of adequate public facilities, rezoning, redevelopment, and infill to meet the 20-year projected housing demand. The proposed redesignation and rezoning of this property would create an opportunity for redevelopment of the site with multi-unit housing to meet market demandand a specific housing demographic. Ordinance No. 6418 Exhibit C, Page 13 of 17 Finding 28: The proposal is consistent with the residential density policies of the Metro Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Element, including PoliciesA.10, A.11 and A.12 which encouragehigher density residential development in areas with existing infrastructure and facilities, close to existing employment and commercial services, proximate to transportation systems and public transit, and in conjunction with services and amenities. The subject site has frontageon a collector street and it is on the northern boundaryofthe PeaceHealth Riverbend campus, which is a major regional employment and health services center. The site is also within walking distance of other employers, major transportation corridors, bus rapid transit, shopping, services, and a variety of urban amenities. Finding 29: The proposal is consistent with Policy A.13 which looks to increase overall residential density in the metropolitan area by creating opportunities for infill, redevelopment and mixed-use while considering impacts on existing neighborhoods.The subject property represents a potential infill / redevelopment opportunity within an existing neighborhood. Finding 30: The proposal is consistent with the residential housing type and tenure policies of the Metro PlanResidential Land Use and Housing Element, including Policies A.17 and A.18 which provide for a full range of housing types, densities, sizes and locations and encourage a mix of structure types and densities within residential designations. Currently, there is a singledetached dwelling on the parcel proposed for development. Theproposed redesignation would allow for up to 24 units to be developedon the property. Finding 31: In accordance with Chapter IV –Metro PlanReview, Amendments, and Refinements, the City’s Comprehensive Plan is not designed or intended to remain static and unyielding in its assignment of land use designations. To that end, provisions of Chapter IV, Policy 7.a, allow for property owners to initiate an amendment to the Metro Plandiagram to reflect a change in circumstances or need. The applicant is proposing to amend the Metro Plandesignation for the subject property from LDR to MDR and to concurrently rezone the property to MDR.There are no conflicts created by this proposed diagram amendment based on needed residential land inventories or needed employment land inventories. The development of this land with residentialuses does not conflict with other land use elements in the Metro Planincluding commercial, industrial, park and open space, or government and education.Adoption of the amendment to the Plan diagramwill not result in an internal inconsistency.Therefore, Criteria B.1 ismet. 2.In cases where Springfield Comprehensive Plan applies, the amendment shall be consistent withthe Springfield Comprehensive Plan. Applicant’s Narrative: “The Residential Land and Housing Policies and Implementation Actions of the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Element apply to the subject site. There are a number of policies in that document which apply to this proposed Metro Plan amendment. These include: Policy H.3, the City shall ‘support community-wide, district wide and neighborhood-specific livability and redevelopment objectives and regional land use planning and transportation planning policies by locating higher density residential development and increasing the density of development near employment or commercial services, within transportation-efficient Mixed- Use Nodal Development centers and along corridors served by frequent transit service.’ Ordinance No. 6418 Exhibit C, Page 14 of 17 Policy H.6, the City shall ‘continue to seek ways to reduce development impediments to more efficient utilization of the residential land supply inside the UGB…’ Policy H.11, the City shall ‘continue to seekways to update development standards to introduce a variety of housing options for all income levels in both existing neighborhoods and new residential areas that match the changing demographics and lifestyles of Springfield residents.’ Policy H.12, the City shall ‘continue to designate land to provide a mix of choices (e.g. Location, accessibility, housing types, and urban and suburban neighborhood character) through the refinement plan update process and through review of developer-initiated master plans.’ Policy H.13, the City shall ‘promote housing development and affordability in coordination with transit plans and in proximity to transit stations.’ \[Policy\] H.14, the City shall ‘continue to update existing neighborhood refinement plan policies andto prepare new plans that emphasize the enhancement of residential neighborhood identity, improved walkability and safety, and improved convenient access to neighborhood services, parks, schools, and employment opportunities.’ \[Policy\] H.15, the City shall ‘update residential development standards to enhance the quality and affordability of neighborhood infill development (e.g. Partitions, duplex developments, transitional neighborhoods, rehab housing, accessory dwelling units) and multi-family development.’ The proposed amendment addresses the changing demographics of the neighborhood and will provide additional housing options. By rezoning the proposed subject property to medium density residential, it would provide a better buffer from the Campus Industrial zoning north of Deadmond Ferry Road and low density residential west of the property. The development will also provide a multi-family housing in close proximity to the public transit system. The City of Springfield also previously adopted the Residential Land Use and Housing Element of the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan. As specified in this written statement, the Springfield 2030 Residential Land \[Use\] and Housing Element designates ‘the areas of the city best suited to high density residential uses are Downtown, Glenwood Riverfront / Franklin Corridor, and Gateway. Plans for these areas shall be updated to support development of additional high density residential uses adjacent to commercial and employment areas (pg.5).’ The subject site is adjacent to and within 2 miles of significant employment and commercial providers including PeaceHealth Sacred Heart Medical Center at Riverbend, PeaceHealth Labs, Pacific Source, Symantec, the Gateway Mall and numerous other commercial and office uses. While the Metro Plan and the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Element are the prevailing Comprehensive Plans for the site, the residential land use policies of the Gateway Refinement Plan also pertain to the proposed development. The Gateway Refinement PlanResidential Element Policy and Implementation Action 1.0 states, ‘The City shall…actively participate in efforts to maintain and enhance residential neighborhoods and attract compatible multi-family developments that would enhance the Gateway Refinement Plan area.’ The proposed Metro Plan \[amendment\] enables multi-family development on the subject property that is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. The subject property is appropriate for MDR designation andzoning given its proximity to other higher-density residential properties, to the Frequent Transit Network, and to large employment centers. The subject property’s orientation to Deadmond Ferry Road is also more compatible with multi-family development than a single-family neighborhood. Therefore, the proposal to redesignate and rezone Ordinance No. 6418 Exhibit C, Page 15 of 17 the subject property from LDR to MDR is consistent and compatible with the adopted policies of the Metro Plan, the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land and Housing Element and the Gateway Refinement Plan.” Finding 32:As stated in the applicant’s project narrative above, the Residential Land and Housing Policies and Implementation Actions of the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Elementapply to the subject site. The proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment is consistent with Policy H.3for the following reasons: there is existing, developedMedium Density Residential designated land on the southern boundary of the property; a similar-sized property to the east was also recently redesignated and rezoned to MDR consistent with these adopted policies; the property is proximate to the Lane Transit District EmX Gateway-Riverbend line with transit stations on Riverbend Drive and International Way to the southeast and north; and the site is strategically located within ¼ to ½-mile walking distance of major local employers, shopping, and services. Finding 33:In accordance with Springfield 2030 Residential Land Use and Housing ElementPolicy H.6, the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment allows for the existing residential parcelwith a single-detached dwellingto be planned and developed much more intensively as a higher density multi-unit site. Redesignation and rezoning of the property to a higher residential density is a necessary step to allow for multi-unit residential dwellingsto be approved and constructed on the site. Finding 34: In accordance with Springfield 2030 Residential Land Use and Housing ElementPolicy H.10, “through the updating and development of each neighborhood refinement plan, district plan or specific area plan, amend land use plans to increase development opportunities for quality affordable housing in locations served by existing and planned frequent transit service that provides access to employment center, shopping, health care, civic, recreational and cultural services.”The subject site is served by existing bus rapid transit, and is in close proximity to employment centers, shopping, and a wide variety of services. Finding 35: In accordance with Springfield 2030 Residential Land Use and Housing ElementPolicy H.11, the proposed Metro Planamendment and Zone Change would allow for multi-unit residential dwellings to be constructed on the site –a form of needed housing in the community. Finding 36: In accordance with Springfield 2030 Residential Land Use and Housing ElementPolicy H.12, the proposed Metro Planamendment and Zone Change would allow for a different type of housing form than otherwise would be allowable in the current LDR configuration. Finding 37:In accordance with Springfield 2030 Residential Land Use and Housing ElementPolicy H.13, the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment is consistent with these policiesbecause the property is within one-halfmile of the Lane Transit District EmX Gateway-Riverbend line, which is identified in the Springfield 2035 Transportation System Planas an existing/planned Frequent Transit Network (see Figure 9 of the Springfield TSP). The property is proximate totransit stations on Riverbend Drive to the southeastand International Way to the north. Finding 38:In accordance with Springfield 2030 Residential Land Use and Housing ElementPolicy H.14, the proposed Metro Plandiagram amendment updates the Gateway Refinement Planmap consistently with these policies. As described above, the subject property is proximate to a Frequent Transit Network and to large employment centers. The property is sufficiently large to meet the solar setback requirements of SDC 3.2-225 for the protection of the LDR property to the west. The Ordinance No. 6418 Exhibit C, Page 16 of 17 existing collector street on the northern boundaryof the site will have no appreciable impact from solar shading. Therefore, the subject property is strategically located for a higher density residential development. Finding 39:While theMetro Planand theSpringfield 2030 Refinement PlanResidential Land Use and Housing Elementare the prevailing Comprehensive Plans for the site, the residential land use policies of the Gateway Refinement Planalso pertain to the proposed development. Finding 40:As amended by Ordinance 6109 adopted January 10, 2005,the Gateway Refinement PlanResidential Element Policy and Implementation Action 2.0requires the City to, “Ensure availabilityof adequate supplies of land appropriate for low-, medium-, and high-density residential development, while allowing for an appropriate mix of commercial, employment and residential uses.” The proposed Metro Plandiagram amendment complies with this policy because it shifts property from the relatively large surplus of LDR-designated property to MDR, which has asmaller overall surplus.As further explained above and in the applicant’s narrative, the subject property is appropriate for MediumDensity Residential designation and zoning given its proximity to other higher-density zoned and designated properties, to the Frequent Transit Network, and to large employment centers. Finding 41:Gateway Refinement PlanResidential ElementPolicy and Implementation Action 1.0 states, “The City shall… actively participate in efforts to maintain and enhance residential neighborhoods and attract compatible multi-family developments that would enhance the Gateway Refinement Plan area.” The proposed Metro Plandiagram amendment complies with this policy by enabling multi-unitdevelopment on the subject property that is compatible and complementary to the existing memory care facility to the south and, overall, with the surrounding neighborhood. As further explained hereinand in the applicant’s narrative, the subject property is appropriate for MDR designation and zoning given its proximity to other higher-density residential designated property, to the Frequent Transit Network, and to large employment centers. The configuration of the subject property and its orientation to Deadmond Ferry Road and Game Farm Road is also more compatible with multi-family development than a single-family neighborhood. Finding 42:The subjectproperty is identified in the Gateway Refinement Planas part of Residential Subarea 4, the “McKenzie-Gateway MDR Subarea.” Under Ordinance 6109, Gateway Refinement PlanPolicy and Implementation Action 13.3requires, “All development within the McKenzie- Gateway MDR Site shall be consistent with an approved Master Plan.” Policy and Implementation Action 13.0 determines the scope of the Master Plan requirement for development in the McKenzie- Gateway MDR Site, “A Master Plan shall be approved under a TypeIV review process, for areas larger than 5 acres within the city limits at the ‘McKenzie-Gateway MDR Site’ on the Refinement Plan Diagram, subsequent to annexation and prior to urban development of any portion of the Master Plan area.”The Master Plan requirement adopted in Ordinance 6109 was intended to facilitate the development of the PeaceHealth RiverBend Hospital and surrounding medical services and mixed- use development. The subject property is not within the boundaries of the Riverbend Master Plan adopted on June 19, 2006. Because the subject property is less than 5 acres in size and not within the area previously subject to the Riverbend Master Plan, the Master Plan requirement stated in Policy 13.3 is not applicable to the subject property. Finding 43:Based on the foregoing, the proposal to redesignate and rezone the subject property from LDR to MDR isconsistent and compatible with the adoptedpolicies of theMetro Plan, the Ordinance No. 6418 Exhibit C, Page 17 of 17 Springfield 2030 Refinement PlanResidential Land and Housing Elementand the Gateway Refinement Plan. Conclusion and Recommendation Based on the applicant’s narrative, the findings herein, testimony submitted into the record,the criteria of SDC 5.14-135 for approving amendments to the Metro Plan, the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment, concurrent Gateway Refinement Planamendment, and zone change from LDR to MDRare consistent with these criteria. To comply with the requirements of EO 20-16 and to ensure that all interested parties can submit testimony inthis matter, staff recommend that the City Council hold open the public record until May 18, 2020. If no additional testimony is received during that time, the Council may then deliberate, hold a second reading, and adopt/not adopt the Ordinance. If there is new testimony submitted before May 18, the Council must further extend the open record period on May 18, to allow the applicant to respond. Ordinance No. 6418 Exhibit D, Page 1 of 8 Staff Reportand Findings Springfield City Council Zone Change Request Hearing Date: May 4, 2020 CaseNumber:811-20-000032-TYP3 Applicant: Rick Satre, Schirmer SatreGroup on behalf of Moving ForwardLLC Property Owner: Moving ForwardLLC Site: 287Deadmond Ferry Road (Map 17-03-15-40, Tax Lot 1800) and an adjoining 16-foot wide by 310.7-foot long panhandle extension of the PeaceHealth Guest House Parcel (Map 17-03-22-00, Portion of Tax Lot 100) Request Rezone a 0.85-acreresidential parcel and a 0.11-acre portion of an adjacent parcelfrom Low Density Residential (LDR) to MediumDensity Residential (MDR). Site Information/Background The application was initiated and accepted as complete onFebruary 3, 2020, and the initial Planning Commission public hearing on the matter of the Zone Change request was held onApril 7, 2020. The Zone Change request is being processed concurrently with a Metro PlanDiagram amendment submitted under separate cover, Case 811-20-000031-TYP4. The City Council will be reviewing both applications and the Planning Commission’s recommendations at a public hearing currently scheduled for May 4, 2020. The property that issubject of the Zone Change request is comprised of a residential parcel containing an existing single-detached dwelling, along with apanhandle extension of an adjoining parcel that runsalong the eastern boundary of the subject site.The approximately 16-foot wide by 310.7-foot long panhandle extension contains the Lyle Hatfield linear pathway and is part of a parcel owned by PeaceHealth. In aggregate, the total site area proposed for rezoning is about 0.96acres. The subject site has frontage on Deadmond Ferry Road along the northern boundary. The site abuts the recently constructed Heartfelt Guest House along the southern boundary and an unincorporated LDR parcel along the western boundary. To the east of the panhandle extension containing the walkway, property at 273 Deadmond Ferry Road was recently redesignated and rezoned to MDR in accordance with Planning Actions 811-18-000181-TYP3 & 811-18-000182-TYP4. The subject property is zoned and designated LDRin accordance with the Metro Planand Gateway Refinement Plandiagrams and the Springfield Zoning Map. The applicant is proposing the zone change from LDR to MDR to facilitate future redevelopment ofthe propertywith multi-unit residential dwellings. The panhandle extension containing the Lyle Hatfield linear pathway is part of Tax Lot 100, which is designated MDR on the Gateway Refinement Plandiagram. The main area of Tax Lot 100 south of the subject property is already zoned MDR so the panhandle extension represents a potential plan/zone conflict. The panhandle extension is recommended for rezoning concurrent with the subject Zoning Map amendment to address the plan/zone conflict and eliminate an intervening sliver of LDR zoning between two MDR parcels (one existing, one proposed). The adjacent and affected property owner, PeaceHealth, has provided concurrence for the proposed rezoning of the panhandle extension. For the aforementioned Ordinance No. 6418 Exhibit D, Page 2 of 8 reasons, staff is recommending that the panhandle extension ofTax Lot 100 isrezoned from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential with this action. Further discussion of this recommended action is found in Criterion 1 below. Notification and Written Comments Notification of the May 4, 2020City Council public hearing was sent to all property owners and residents within 300 feet of the siteon March 16, 2020.Notification of the April 7, 2020 Planning Commission and May 4, 2020 City Council public hearings was published in the March 24 and 31, 2020editions of the Register-Guard. Staff responded to one telephone call requesting additional information about the proposal andan email requesting copiesof the staff reports for the April 7, 2020 Planning Commission public hearing.A letter in support of the proposal was received from the Oregon Fair Housing Council (Attachment 6). To comply with the Governor’s strong recommendation in Executive Order 20-12 that local governments implement social distancing and conduct work remotely as much as possible,the April 7, 2020 Planning Commission meeting was conducted via an online meeting platform that also allows members of the public to join the meeting virtually or call-in via a toll free number. In addition, members of the public were permitted to view the online meeting and submit public testimony in person at Springfield City Hall. No members of the public attended. On April 16, 2020, the Governor issued Executive Order 20-16, which requires governing bodies to hold public meetings and hearings by telephone, video, or through other electronic or virtual means whenever possible. The governing body must make available a method by which the public can listen to or virtually attend the public meeting or hearing at the time it occurs. Executive Order 20-16 allows governing bodies to accept public testimony by telephone, video, or other virtual or electronic means, or to provide a means to submit written testimony (including email or other electronic methods) that the governing body can consider in a timelymanner. Executive Order 20-16 overrides conflicting requirements for quasi-judicial public hearings in state law or in the Springfield Development Code or Metro Plan. The May 4 City Council public hearing is being conducted via online meeting platform that allows members of the public to listen to the meeting online or by calling a toll free number. Members of the public may provide testimony to the Council by observing the online meeting at City Hall in Council chambers, or by joining the online meeting remotely. The public may listen to the meeting byphone but cannot provide testimony by phone. To comply with the requirements of EO 20-16 and to ensure that all interested parties can submit testimony in this matter, the City Council held open the public record until May 18, 2020. No additional testimony has been received. Criteria of Approval Section 5.22-100 of the Springfield Development Code (SDC) contains the criteria of approval for the decision maker to utilize during review of Zoning Map amendment requests. The Criteria of Zoning Map amendmentapproval criteria are: SDC 5.22-115CRITERIA C.Zoning Map amendment criteria of approval: 1.Consistency with applicable Metro Planpolicies and the Metro Plan diagram; 2.Consistency with applicable Refinement Plans, Plan District maps, Conceptual Development Plans and functional plans; and Ordinance No. 6418 Exhibit D, Page 3 of 8 3.The property is presently provided with adequate public facilities, services and transportation networks to support the use, or these facilities, services andtransportation networks are planned to be provided concurrently with the development of the property. 4.Legislative Zoning Map amendments that involve a Metro Plan Diagram amendment shall: a.Meet the approval criteria specified in Section 5.14-100; and b.Comply with Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-012-0060, where applicable. Proposed Findings In Support of Zone Change Approval Criterion: Zoning Map amendment criteria of approval: 1. Consistency with applicable Metro Planpolicies and the Metro Plan diagram; Applicant’s Narrative: “The Zoning Map amendment is consistent with the Metro Plan policies and diagram. The Zoning Map amendmentdoes not amend any Metro Plan policies or text and is submitted concurrently with a Metro Plan amendment. The following Metro Plan policies support the proposed zone change: Metro Plan Policy 1 – The UGB and sequential development shall continue to be implemented as an essential means to achieve compacturban growth. The provision of all urban services shall be concentrated inside the UGB. The Metro Plan policies define compact growth as ‘the filling in of vacant and underutilized lands in the UGB.’ The proposed rezoning will fill underutilized low- density residential land with more compact medium-density residential land. The parceliswithin the Springfield Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) andcity limits. The development will follow the acknowledged comprehensive plan ordinances and will have access tourban facilities and services. As such, the subject site provides for compact urban growth and essential services. Metro Plan Policy A.1 – Encourage the consolidation of residentially zoned parcels to facilitate more options for development and redevelopment of such parcels. The proposed rezoning will permit more options for development. Through rezoning the parcelto medium density residential, the subject site is in keeping with the direction in which the neighborhood is moving. Metro Plan Policy A.3– Provide an adequate supply of buildable residential land within the UGB for the 20-year planning period at the time of Periodic Review. As mentioned in the concurrent Metro Plan Amendment application, the Springfield 2030 Residential Land and Housing Element designates ‘the areas of the city best suited to high density residential uses are Downtown, Glenwood Riverfront/Franklin Corridor, and Gateway. Plans for these areas shall be updated to support development of additional high density residential uses adjacent to commercial and employment areas (pg.5).’ The subject site is nearby and within 2 miles of significant employment and commercial providers including PeaceHealth Sacred Heart Medical Center at Riverbend, PeaceHealth Labs, Pacific Source, Symantec, the Gateway Mall and numerous other commercial and office uses. Metro Plan Policy A.9 – Establish density ranges in local zoning and development regulations that are consistent with the broad density categories of this plan. The proposed rezoning will result in development that meets the broad density requirements of the Metro Plan. Upon adoption of the Ordinance No. 6418 Exhibit D, Page 4 of 8 amending Ordinance, the Metro Plan diagram would be amended, and the requested zone change from LDR to MDR would be consistent with the provisions of the adopted Comprehensive Plan. Metro Plan Policy A.10 – Promote higher residential density inside the UGB that utilizes existing infrastructure, improves the efficiency of public services and facilities, and conserves rural resource lands outside the UGB. As previously mentioned, the rezoning will result in higher density development than the current low-density residential zoning. In this manner, a higher number of residents will use existing infrastructure. This creates a more efficient use of public services and facilities, as a greater number of people are living in proximity to existing facilities. Moreover, rural resource lands are conserved, as more units are provided within the UGB. Metro Plan Policy A.11 – Generally locate higher density residential development near employment or commercial services, in proximity to major transportation systems or within transportation- efficient nodes.The proposed rezoning will locate medium density residential development near GameFarm Road, Deadmond Ferry, and Beltline Rd, all of which are key corridors in the City of Springfield. The subject site is also located near parks, schools, and services and amenities as well as the bus rapid transit EmX line (International Way). It is an ideal location to provide access and opportunities to commercial services, employment, and major transportation systems. Metro Plan Policy A.12 – Coordinate higher density residential development with the provision of adequate infrastructure and services, open space, and other urban amenities. As mentioned in the response to Metro Plan Policy A.10, the proposed rezoning will ensure adequate infrastructure and services are provided to the subject site. Open space will be provided through the requirements found throughout the Springfield Development Code. Metro Plan Policy A.13 – Increase overall residential density in the metropolitan area by creating more opportunities for effectively designed in-fill, redevelopment, and mixed use while considering impacts of increased residential density on historic, existing and future neighborhoods. The proposed zoning will provide an effective and compatible transition between densities. The site is proximate to properties that are zoned and designated for medium density residential development to the south;these include the abutting PeaceHealth Heartfelt Construction and multi-family housing. While there are some long-established residential uses on Deadmond \[Ferry\] Road to the west, the subject properties are in an area which, as it develops/redevelops, is moving away from low density residential uses. As such, the proposed Zone Change is compatible with existing uses in the vicinity and allows for effective infill development that maximizes land utility. Metro Plan Policy A.23 – Reduce impacts of higher density residential and mixed-use development on surrounding uses by considering site, landscape, and architectural design standards or guidelines in local zoning and development regulations. The proposedrezoning is compatible with surrounding uses and therefore, shall have minimal impact on adjacent commercial and residential uses. As the proposal calls for medium density residential to best transition to and from adjacent uses, the suggested zoning is compatible with this policy. Therefore, the Metro Plan diagram will not be inconsistent with thiszoning map amendment, should both amendments be approved.” Finding 1:Metro Plan Chapter IV, Policy 7.a states: “A property owner may initiate a \[Type I Metro Plandiagram\] amendment for property they own at any time. Owner initiated amendments are subject to the limitations for such amendments set out in the development code of the home city.” Ordinance No. 6418 Exhibit D, Page 5 of 8 Finding 2: The property owner initiated a concurrent Metro PlanDiagram amendment in accordance with provisions of SDC 5.14-100 (Case 811-20-000031-TYP4). Upon adoption of the amending Ordinance, the Metro PlanDiagram would be amended and the requested zone change from LDR to MDR would be consistent with the provisions of the adopted Comprehensive Plan. Prior or concurrent amendment of the Metro PlanDiagram will be required for the subject zone change request to be approved. Finding 3:The proposed zone change is consistent with provisions of the Metro Plan whereby zoning can be monitored and adjusted as necessary to meet current urban land use demands.The requested change from LDR to MDR would facilitate the future review and approval of multi-unit residential dwellingson the site. Finding 4:The subject site is adjacent toproperty that iszoned and designated MDRto the south and east. There is an intervening, 17-foot widestrip of LDR-zoned property (a panhandle extension of Tax Lot 100) that lies between the easternboundary of the subject site and the MDR zoned property to the east (273 Deadmond Ferry Road).The approximately 17-foot wide by 310-foot long strip of land is zonedLDR but designated MDR in the adopted Gateway Refinement Plan.Staff is recommending that the strip of LDR isrezoned toMDR through this Zoning Map amendment action(Case 811-20-000032-TYP3). Finding 5: The site is proximate to property that is zoned and designated for Campus Industrial uses across the street on the north side of Deadmond Ferry Road. As such, the proposed Zone Change is consistent with nearbyzoning andthe zone change is compatible with existing uses in the vicinity. The proposed zoning is consistent with Policy A.11 for the following reasons: there is existing Medium Density Residential designated land to the east and south ofthe property; the property abuts anewly-constructedlodging facility (Heartfelt Guest House) to thesouth; the property is proximate to the Lane Transit District EmX Gateway-Riverbend line with transit stations on Riverbend Drive and International Way to the southeast and north; and the site is strategically located within ¼ to ½-mile walking distance of major local employers, shopping, and services. 2. Consistency with applicable Refinement Plans, Plan District maps, Conceptual Development Plans and functional plans; Applicant’s Narrative: “The adopted Metro Plan is the principal document that creates a framework for land use policy within the City of Springfield. The subject property is within the adopted Gateway Refinement Plan area. As noted in Goal 2, adoption of the new Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Element, replaced the goals, objectives and policies of the Metro Plan’s Residential Land Use and Housing Element. This relationship therefore requires the proposed amendment be consistent with the Springfield Comprehensive Plan and the Gateway Refinement Plan. The proposed Metro Plan amendment does not make the Metro Plan internally inconsistent. It does not affect any Metro Plan policies or text. Moreover, the Gateway Refinement Plan will not be made inconsistent through this amendment. The Gateway Refinement Plan will be amended automatically in conjunction with the Metro Plan amendments. There is no conflict created by the proposed amendment to the residential land inventory, needed employment landinventory, nor any other land use elements of the Metro Plan or Gateway Refinement Plan. The City of Springfield also previously adopted the Residential Land Use and Housing Element of the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan. As specified in this written statement along with the concurrent Metro Plan Amendment application, the Springfield 2030 Residential Land and Housing Element designates ‘the areasof the city best suited to high density residential Ordinance No. 6418 Exhibit D, Page 6 of 8 uses are Downtown, Glenwood Riverfront/Franklin Corridor, and Gateway. Plans for these areas shall be updated to support development of additional high density residential uses adjacent to commercial and employment areas (pg.5).’ The subject site is nearby and within 2 miles of significant employment and commercial providers including PeaceHealth Sacred Heart Medical Center at Riverbend, PeaceHealth Labs, Pacific Source, Symantec, the Gateway Mall and numerous other commercial and office uses.” Finding 6: Theproperty lies within the adopted GatewayRefinement Planarea of Springfield. Therefore, the Residential land use policies of the Gateway Refinement Planapply to the subject site. In accordance with Residential Policyand Implementation Action 1.0, “the City shall, through site plan review, home and neighborhood improvement programs, and/or other related programs, actively participate in efforts to maintain and enhance existing residential neighborhoods and attract compatible multi-familydevelopments that would enhance the Gateway Refinement Plan area.” Finding 7: The applicant’s statement regardingadoption of the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Elementis not consistent with the applicant’s Goal 2 findings in the accompanying Metro Plan amendment report (Case 811-20-000031-TYP4). It should be clarified that the adopted Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Elementupdates and refines, but does not replace, the Residential Land Use and Housing Elementof the Metro Plan. Finding 8:The subject property is sufficiently large to represent a viable multi-unitdevelopment site. Upon rezoning of the subject property, should this occur, the developer would be required to undertake a Site Plan Review for any type of development on the site. A subdivision ofthe property would be requiredin order to achieve the minimum required density of six units per acre under the current LDR zoning. Therefore, developing the property as a single, consolidated site would be more efficient and allow for highest and best use of the land. Finding 9:Rezoning of the subject property from LDR to MDR is consistent with the requested Metro Plandiagram and Gateway Refinement Plandiagram amendments initiated by the applicant in accordance with Case 811-20-000031-TYP4. Staff is also recommending that a 17-foot wide by 310-foot long panhandle extension of Tax Lot 100 (owned by PeaceHealth) is rezoned to MDR concurrently with the requested Zoning Mapamendment. This rezoning action would address a zoning non-conformity and bring theadjoiningpanhandle extension into compliance with the current Gateway Refinement Plan diagram. 3.The property is presently provided with adequate public facilities, services and transportation networks to support the use, or these facilities, services and transportation networks are planned to be provided concurrently with the development of the property. Applicant’s Narrative: “Finally, the subject site has adequate public facilities, services, and transportation to support the proposed use. The subject fronts Deadmond Ferry Road which is a fully developed urban arterialstreet with one vehicle travel lane and bicycle lanes in each direction. The street has lane striping, street lighting, street trees, sidewalks and piped stormwater management facilities. In addition, one of the Lyle Hatfield Linear Paths abuts the eastern boundary line of the subject property and the public transit system provides services near the development via the EMX Springfield route and stations.” Finding 10:The property requested for Zone Change has frontage on Deadmond Ferry Road, which is classified as a major collector street. Along the northern boundary of the property frontage, Ordinance No. 6418 Exhibit D, Page 7 of 8 Deadmond Ferry Roadis a fully developed urban collector street with one vehicle travel lane and bicycle lane in each direction and a bi-directional center turn lane. The paved street has lane striping, street lighting, street trees, sidewalks and piped stormwater management facilities. Afull suite of public utilitiesand serviceswith sufficient capacity to support the requested rezoning from LDR to MDR are availableon the perimeter of the subject propertyincluding the following: Sanitary Sewer: There is an existing sanitary sewer line that runs along the Deadmond Ferry Road frontage of the subject site. Staff has determined that the public sewer line has adequate capacity for future development on the property. Storm Sewer: There are public storm sewer lines that run along the Deadmond Ferry Road frontage of the subject site. The existing public stormwater lines have adequate capacity for future development of the property. Upon redevelopment of the subject property, stormwater runoff will need to be managed and treated on site. Water: The subject property was recently annexed to the City of Springfield and, as such, the water service provider for the property will be changed from Rainbow Water District to SUB Water on or around July 1, 2020. Electricity: SUB Electric has overhead electrical facilities along the Deadmond Ferry Road frontage of the property. The existing facilities are suitable for future redevelopment of the site with additional dwelling units. Telecommunications: Comcast and CenturyLink have telecommunication facilities along the Deadmond Ferry Road frontage of the property. The existing facilities are suitable for future redevelopment of the site with additional dwelling units. Future development of the site withMediumDensity Residentialuses would be subject to the land use approvalprocess outlined in Section 5.17-100 of the City’s Development Code.Site Plan Review procedures will detail the design of residential construction, the location of utility connections and conformance with the criteria of approval for Site Plan Review. 4.Legislative Zoning Map amendments that involve a Metro Plan Diagram amendment shall: a.Meet the approval criteria specified in Section 5.14-100; and b.Comply with Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-012-0060, where applicable. Applicant’s Narrative: “Regarding the criteria contained in 5.22-115.C.4.a and SDC 5.22- 115.C.4.b, compliance with the approval criteria specified in Section 5.14-100 is established in the concurrent Metro Plan Amendment. Compliance with OAR 660-012-0060 is also established in the written statement for the concurrent Metro Plan amendment. The change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential…would increase the trip generation potential of the subject property, so the applicant will address the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) to determine if there’s a significant affect. To do this, the applicant has commissioned Kelly Sandow, a Licensed Traffic Engineer, to evaluate whether the plan amendment and zone change will have a significant impact on Deadmond Ferry Road. The traffic scoping letter created by Kelly Sandow is provided \[herein\].” Finding 11: The applicant has submitted a concurrent Metro PlanDiagram amendment application (Case 811-20-000031-TYP4) under separate cover.The applicant’s submittal materials, narrative, and staff findings and recommendations demonstrate compliance with the Metro Planamendment provisions of Chapter IV of the Metro Planand SDC 5.14-135. Ordinance No. 6418 Exhibit D, Page 8 of 8 Finding 12: The requested Zone Change is being undertaken as a site-specific change in compliance with provisions of the adopted Metro Planand the City’s Development Code. The applicant has initiated an amendment to the Metro PlanDiagram to change the designation from LDR to MDR under separate cover (Case 811-20-000031-TYP4).Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR) 660-012-0060 requires that, “if an amendment to a functional plan, an acknowledged comprehensive plan, or a land use regulation (including a zoning map), would significantly affect an existing orplanned transportation facility, then the local government must put in place measures” to mitigate the impact, as defined in OAR 660-012- 0060(2). Based on the findings in the traffic scoping letter and the findings under Goal 12in the concurrent Metro Plan Diagram amendment, no significant affect will occur and therefore no mitigation measures are necessary.Therefore, the proposed rezoning complies with Goal 12. Conclusion:Based on the above-listed criteria,the criteria for rezoning have been met. Conditions of Approval SDC Section 5.22-120 allows for the Approval Authority to attach conditions of approval to aZone Change request to ensure the application fully meets the criteria of approval. The specific language from thecode sectionis cited below: 5.22-120 CONDITIONS The Approval Authority may attach conditions as may be reasonably necessary in order to allow the Zoning Map amendment to be granted. Staff advises thatthe Zone Change request was initiated in accordance with provisions of the City’s Development Code.The Planning Commission reviewedand deliberatedon the totality of the submitted information and unanimously adopteda recommendation of support for the proposal attached hereto. Because the applicant has initiated concurrentMetro Planand Gateway Refinement Plan diagram amendments (Case 811-20-000031-TYP4), the comprehensive plan amendment will need to be completed prior to or concurrent with approval of the Zone Change. Provisions for concurrent amendment of the Metro Plandiagram, Gateway Refinement Plandiagram and Zoning Map have beenincorporated into the amending Ordinanceattached hereto. Ordinance No. 6418